Musch J, Bröder A
Psychological Institute, University of Bonn, Germany.
Br J Educ Psychol. 1999 Mar;69 ( Pt 1):105-16. doi: 10.1348/000709999157608.
Two competing theoretical models to explain academic performance were proposed. The interference model stresses the detrimental effect of task-irrelevant thoughts during the test-taking situation whereas the deficit model suggests Study Habits and domain-specific skills as main predictors of test performance.
The study compares the two models by determining the relative contribution of Test Anxiety, Study Habits, and Maths Skill to performance in a statistics exam.
Sixty-six undergraduate students who were enrolled in the first semester of two parallel introductory statistic courses participated in the study.
Hierarchical regression analyses were performed on the performance in the final statistics exam. The unique variance attributable to Test Anxiety, Study Habits, and Maths Skill was calculated.
Both Maths Skill and Test Anxiety added unique variance in explaining performance, whereas Study Habits did not. Although Maths Skill emerged as relatively more important than Test Anxiety, a purely deficit-based account nevertheless appears untenable because interfering effects of Test Anxiety during the examination also contributed an important portion of variance.
It is recommended that cognitive-attentional accounts stressing test anxiety be supplemented by a deficit formulation, and that multimodal counselling address both Test Anxiety and skill deficits.
Methodological problems in investigating the causal relationship between skill deficits, anxiety, and performance are discussed.
提出了两种相互竞争的理论模型来解释学业成绩。干扰模型强调在考试过程中与任务无关的思维的有害影响，而缺陷模型则认为学习习惯和特定领域技能是考试成绩的主要预测因素。
本研究通过确定考试焦虑、学习习惯和数学技能对统计学考试成绩的相对贡献来比较这两种模型。
66名就读于两门平行的统计学入门课程第一学期的本科生参与了该研究。
对统计学期末考试成绩进行分层回归分析。计算出可归因于考试焦虑、学习习惯和数学技能的独特方差。
数学技能和考试焦虑在解释成绩方面都增加了独特方差，而学习习惯则没有。尽管数学技能比考试焦虑显得相对更重要，但纯粹基于缺陷的解释似乎仍然站不住脚，因为考试期间考试焦虑的干扰效应也贡献了很大一部分方差。
建议用缺陷表述来补充强调考试焦虑的认知-注意力解释，并且多模式咨询应同时解决考试焦虑和技能缺陷问题。
讨论了研究技能缺陷、焦虑和成绩之间因果关系时的方法学问题。
